Community Treatment Orders Research Articles

Is it the right time to implement Community Treatment Order in India?

India enacted the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 (MHCA 2017) on April 7, 2017 to align and harmonize with United Nations Convention on Persons with Disabilities and the principles of prioritizing human rights protection. While MHCA 2017 is oriented toward the rights of the patients, the rights of the family members and professionals delivering treatment, care, and support to persons with severe mental disorder (SMD) often suffer. MHCA 2017 mandates discharge planning in consultation with the patients for admitted patients and makes the service providers responsible for ensuring continuity of care in the community. The concerns surrounding the chances of relapse and recurrence when a person with a SMD stops medications continue to remain largely unaddressed. The rights-based MHCA 2017 makes it difficult for the prevailing practices of surreptitious treatment by the family/caregiver and proxy consultations on behalf of the patients. This will, in turn, lead to increased chances of relapse, risk of violence, homelessness, stigma, and suicide in persons with SMDs in the community, largely due to noncompliance to treatment. This will also result in increased caregiver burden and burnouts and may also cause disruptions in the family and the community. To strike a balance over the current MHCA 2017, there is a need to amend or bring-forth a new law rooted in the principles of community treatment order.

The utility of outpatient commitment: Reduced-risks of victimization and crime perpetration

BackgroundOutpatient civil commitment (OCC) provisions, community treatment orders (CTOs) in Australia and Commonwealth nations, are part of mental health law worldwide.This study considers whether and by what means OCC provides statutorily required “needed-treatment” addressing two aspects of its legal mandate to protect the safety of self (exclusive of deliberate-self-harm) and others. MethodOver a 12.4-year period, records of hospitalized-psychiatric-patients, 11,424 with CTO-assignment and 16,161 without CTO-assignment were linked to police-records. Imminent-safety-threats included perpetrations and victimizations by homicides, rapes, assaults/abductions, and robberies. “Need for treatment” determinations were validated independently by Health of the Nations Scale (HoNOS) severity-score-profiles. Logistic regressions, with propensity-score- adjustment and control for 46 potential confounding-factors, were used to evaluate the association of CTO-assignment with occurrence-risk of perpetrations and victimizations. ResultsCTO-assignment was associated with reduced safety-risk: 17% in initial-perpetrations, 11% in initial-victimizations, and 22% for repeat-perpetrations. Each ten-community-treatment-days in interaction with CTO-assignment was associated with a 3.4% reduced-perpetration-risk. CTO-initiated-re-hospitalization was associated with a 13% reduced-initial-perpetration-risk, a 17% reduced-initial-victimization-risk, and a 22% reduced-repeat-victimization-risk. All risk-estimates appear to be the unique contributions of the CTO, CTO-initiated-re-hospitalization, or the provision of ten-community-treatment-days—i.e. after accounting for the influence of prior crimes and victimizations, ethnic-bias, neighborhood disadvantage and other between-group differences in the analysis. ConclusionsCTO assignment’s association with reduced criminal-victimization and perpetration-risk, in conjunction with requiring participation in needed-treatment via re-hospitalization and community-service, adds support to the conclusion that OCC is to some extent fulfilling its legal objectives related to protecting safety of self (exclusive of deliberate-self-harm), and others.

The legal oversight of community treatment orders: A qualitative analysis of tribunal decision-making

Community treatment orders (CTOs) have been in place in various jurisdictions for over three decades, and yet are still a controversial aspect of mental health provision. One of the ethical concerns CTOs may engender is how difficult it can be to secure discharge from them, which in some jurisdictions can result in service users being subject to compulsion in the community indefinitely. Given the questions that can therefore be raised about the discharge process, it is important to understand the role of the mental health tribunal as a key safeguard in the management of CTOs. However, whilst a substantial body of literature exists on CTOs and on various aspects of tribunal practice in inpatient settings respectively, relatively little has been written about the role of the tribunal in the oversight of CTO discharge decisions. This article presents the results of an eight month ethnographic investigation into CTO use in England, focusing on the factors which contribute to tribunal decisions. A total of 62 participants were involved in the study, including 18 service users on CTOs, 36 mental health practitioners and 8 tribunal chairs. A combination of interviews, observations and documentary analysis are drawn upon to illustrate tribunal decision-making practice on CTOs. The key themes reported on are: the mediating influence of participant presentation and interaction in tribunals; tribunal framing and interpretation of insight and risk; and the importance of timing to tribunals, both in terms of the perceived stability of a service user's social circumstances, and the length of the CTO. The findings highlight the cumulative and interrelated effect of such factors on tribunal decision-making, and point to how tribunal judgements are heavily weighted towards upholding CTOs, with the implications that holds for individual rights.

Rates, determinants and outcomes associated with the use of community treatment orders in young people experiencing first episode psychosis

BackgroundCommunity treatment orders (CTOs) are a controversial form of involuntary treatment for individuals affected by mental health disorders and yet little is known about the use of CTOs in first presentations. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the rates, determinants and outcomes associated with the use of CTOs in young people with a first episode of psychosis (FEP). MethodsThis epidemiological cohort study included all individuals aged 15–24 who presented with a FEP to the Early Psychosis Prevention and Intervention Centre (EPPIC) in Melbourne between 01.01.2011 and 31.12.13. ResultsA total of 544 young people presented with a FEP during the study period and of these, 93 (17.3%) were subject to a CTO during their episode of care. A total of 69.7% of CTOs were commenced after the first three months of treatment and the median duration of CTOs was 168.5 days. Males, a diagnosis of a schizophrenia spectrum disorder and a concurrent substance abuse disorder were associated with the use of CTOs. Additionally, young people with more severe positive psychotic symptoms were more likely to be subject to a CTO. At the time of discharge, only 38.7% of those subject to a CTO were in education or employment compared to 65.4% of those who had not been subject to a CTO. ConclusionsThe majority of CTOs are commenced after at least three months of treatment, however the optimal timing of CTO implementation needs to be determined. The poor functioning of young people on a CTO should be the focus of future interventional studies.

Does legislative change affect the use and duration of compulsory treatment orders?

Victoria, Australia, introduced reformed mental health legislation in 2014. The Act was based on a policy platform of recovery-oriented services, supported decision-making and minimisation of the use and duration of compulsory orders. This paper compares service utilisation and legal status after being on a community treatment order under the Mental Health Act 1986 (Vic) with that under the Mental Health Act 2014 (Vic). We obtained two distinct data sets of persons who had been on a community treatment order for at least 3 months and their subsequent treatment episodes over 2 years under the Mental Health Act and/or as an inpatient for the periods 2008-2010 (Mental Health Act 1986) and 2014-2016 (Mental Health Act 2014). The two sets were compared to assess the difference in use, duration and odds of having a further admission over 2 years. We also considered the mode of discharge - whether by the treating psychiatrist, external body or through expiry. Compared with the Mental Health Act 1986, under the Mental Health Act 2014, index community treatment orders were shorter (mean 227 days compared with 335 days); there was a reduction in the mean number of community treatment orders in the 2 years following the index discharge - 1.1 compared with 1.5 (incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 0.71, 95% confidence interval = [0.63, 0.80]) - and a 51% reduction in days on an order over 2 years. There was a reduction in the number of subsequent orders for those whose order expired or was revoked by the psychiatrist under the Mental Health Act 2014 compared to those under the Mental Health Act 1986. The number of orders which were varied to an inpatient order by the authorised psychiatrist was notably greater under the Mental Health Act 2014. The reformed Mental Health Act has been successful in its intent to reduce the use and duration of compulsory orders in the community. The apparent increase in return to inpatient orders raises questions regarding the intensity and effectiveness of community treatment and context of service delivery.

Contextual issues in the implementation of mental health legislation

Mental Health services in Victoria, Australia have seen major reform over the past 30 years. Rights based mental health legislation and major structural changes supported a reduction in bed based services and the development of a strong community mental health sector from the mid 1990's. Community Treatment Orders were established in the Mental Health Act (1986) and widely used across the State. Reformed legislation in 2014 brought greater emphasis on supported decision making and recovery orientation. Funding for mental health services did not keep pace with significant population growth, with consequent reduction in bed availability and intensity of community based services.This paper considers the impact of funding and service availability on the intended policy and practice directions of mental health legislation with particular consideration of the impact on the utilisation of Community Treatment Orders.

The use of outpatient commitment in Norway: Who are the patients and what does it involve?

PurposeDespite one of the longest histories of using Outpatient Commitment (OC), little is known about the use in the Norwegian context. Reporting from the Norwegian Outpatient Commitment Study, this article aims to: establish the profile of the OC population in Norway; ascertain the legal justification for the use of OC and what OC involves for patients; investigate possible associations between selected patient and service characteristics and duration of OC, and; explore potential differences based on gender or rurality. MethodsA retrospective multi-site study, extracting data from the medical records of all patients on OC in six large regional hospitals in 2008–12, with detailed investigation over 36 months of the subsample of patients on first ever OC-order in 2008–09. We use descriptive statistics to establish the profile of the OC population and the legal justification for and the content of OC, and logistic regression to examine factors associated with duration of OC over 36 months. Results1414 patients were on OC over the 5 years, and 274 had their first OC in 2008–09. The sample included more men than woman, and three-quarters were diagnosed with schizophrenia. They had long service histories, including involuntary admissions. The legal justification for all OC-orders was the need for treatment, and 18% were additionally justified by dangerousness. The option to initiate OC directly from the community was not used in any of the 274 first ever OC-orders. While 98% of patients were prescribed psychotropic medication, under half had an Involuntary Treatment Order, which under the Norwegian OC regime is required in addition to the OC-order to oblige patients to accept treatment (usually medication). 60% of patients had ≥2 clinical contacts monthly. There were some gender differences in descriptive analyses with men generally being worse off, but no clear pattern in terms of rurality. Patients in the sample had been on OC between one week and 20 years. The median duration of OC over 36 months was 365 days. Three factors contributed to longer duration: the use of the dangerousness criterion; a diagnosis of schizophrenia disorder, and; considerable problems with substance abuse. ConclusionThe characteristics of the OC population in Norway are very similar to that reported in other jurisdictions. Medication seems to be the central focus of OC, yet additional Involuntary Treatment Orders are imposed for less than half of patients. While all OC-orders were justified by the need to ensure treatment, risk seems to be a concern for a subgroup of patients who are kept on for longer. How the 2017 amendment to the mental health act, which precludes compulsion for competent patients unless danger is present, will affect OC use, remains to be seen. Further studies should specifically focus on variation in the use of OC, including at the level of individual clinicians.

Update on Assisted Outpatient Treatment.

Assisted outpatient treatment (AOT) is an outpatient court-ordered treatment for people with severe mental illness (SMI) whose care needs are often unmet in the community due, in part, to treatment non-adherence. AOT is controversial, and the goal of this review is to provide an update on recent research, the status of AOT in the United States, and future directions for research and implementation. Several recent studies have demonstrated that it is not just a lack of access to appropriately intensive care that prevents some individuals with SMI from engaging in and benefiting from treatment and that AOT can improve engagement and patient outcomes over and above the provision of care. The future of AOT in the United States is still somewhat uncertain and will largely depend on the effectiveness and sustainability of the SAMHSA AOT grant programs. Future research efforts should investigate the conditions under which and for whom AOT can be most effective, to help avoid poor outcomes for this vulnerable population.

Evaluating the effects of community treatment orders (CTOs) in England using the Mental Health Services Dataset (MHSDS): protocol for a national, population-based study

IntroductionSupervised community treatment (SCT) for people with serious mental disorders has become accepted practice in many countries around the world. In England, SCT was adopted in 2008 in the form...

5.58 Investigation of the Role of Outpatient Commitment Laws, Access to Care, and Native American Ethnicity on Suicide Rates in Adolescents by State

5.58 Investigation of the Role of Outpatient Commitment Laws, Access to Care, and Native American Ethnicity on Suicide Rates in Adolescents by State

Compulsory community treatment and ethnicity: Findings from a culturally and linguistically diverse area of Queensland

ObjectiveTo compare the use of community treatment orders (CTOs) and forensic orders (FOs) in a culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) population to that in a non-CALD population. MethodsWe analysed the relationship between coming from a CALD background and the use of CTOs and FOs on discharge from hospital using merged data from the Metro South Addiction and Mental Health Service's Transitions of Care (ToC) and Consumer Integrated Mental Health Application (CIMHA) databases. ResultsNine hundred and seventy-six individual records were included in the data set, of whom eighty-six were from a CALD background (8.8%). Three hundred and eleven patients were on compulsory community treatment. Use of compulsory community treatment (CTOs and FOs) was similar for those born in Australasia, British Isles, North America and Europe but significantly higher for those born elsewhere even after adjusting for socio-demographic and clinical variables (Adj OR 2.19, 95% CI 1.36–3.52). The use of an interpreter significantly increased the likelihood of compulsory community treatment (Adj OR 2.76, 95% CI 1.20–6.35). Restricting the analyses to CTOs only did not alter these results. ConclusionsMetro South residents from a CALD background outside of Europe were over-represented on compulsory community treatment orders. This could reflect the difficulties in accessing voluntary services, communication barriers, stigma associated with mental illness, discrimination, or issues related to accurately diagnosing mental illness cross-culturally. Clinicians need to be aware of the complexity of working with people from diverse cultures and apply these orders judiciously.

Who’s Talking About Us Without Us? A Survivor Research Interjection into an Academic Psychiatry Debate on Compulsory Community Treatment Orders in Ireland

This paper presents a user/survivor researcher perspective to the debate among psychiatrists on the suggested introduction of Community Treatment Orders in Ireland. Critical questions are raised about evidence and the construction of psychiatric knowledge. Important questions include: How is this evidence created? What and whose knowledge have not been considered? Some critical issues around coercion, ‘insight’, and attributions of ‘lack of capacity’ are briefly considered. Further legal considerations are then introduced based on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disability. The paper concludes with a human rights-based appeal to reject the introduction of coercive community treatment in Ireland.

How clinicians make decisions about CTOs in ACT: a qualitative study

BackgroundThe first 12 Norwegian assertive community treatment (ACT) teams were piloted from 2009 to 2011. Of the 338 patients included during the teams’ first year of operation, 38% were subject to community treatment orders (CTOs). In Norway as in many other Western countries, the use of CTOs is relatively high despite lack of robust evidence for their effectiveness. The purpose of the present study was to explore how responsible clinicians reason and make decisions about the continued use of CTOs, recall to hospital and the discontinuation of CTOs within an ACT setting.MethodsSemi-structured interviews with eight responsible clinicians combined with patient case files and observations of treatment planning meetings. The data were analysed using a modified grounded theory approach.ResultsThe participants emphasized that being part of a multidisciplinary team with shared caseload responsibility that provides intensive services over long periods of time allowed for more nuanced assessments and more flexible treatment solutions on CTOs. The treatment criterion was typically used to justify the need for CTO. There was substantial variation in the responsible clinicians’ legal interpretation of dangerousness, and some clinicians applied the dangerousness criterion more than others.ConclusionsAccording to the clinicians, many patients subject to CTOs were referred from hospitals and high security facilities, and decisions regarding the continuation of CTOs typically involved multiple and interacting risk factors. While patients’ need for treatment was most often applied to justify the need for CTOs, in some cases the use of CTOs was described as a tool to contain dangerousness and prevent harm.

Community treatment orders in England: review of usage from national data.

Community treatment orders in England: review of usage from national data.

Towards Changing Compulsory Community Mental Health Treatment in New Zealand: Shining Light on How Community Treatment Orders Are Produced

In this paper, we use a constructed scenario to illustrate making a compulsory community treatment order in the New Zealand context. Drawing on publicly available documentation, we outline the existing mental health law framework that produces community treatment orders and emerging complex problems of their high, increasing and disproportionate use. We provide examples of human rights, indigenous and clinical effectiveness research that appear to be destabilising the existing mental health law framework. We argue assemblage theory (Deleuze & Guattari) is a useful theoretical tool to unpack the making and continued use of compulsory community treatment orders in the context of complex destabilising and stabilising influences. This is followed by an outline of the concept of assemblage with reference to the constructed scenario, focusing on processes, practices, places, types of knowledge, roles, documents and how they connect to produce certain effects that both enable and constrain participants’ actions. In the New Zealand context, we examine the potential for assemblage theory to generate new ways of thinking about compulsory mental health treatment in community settings by challenging perceived limitations and revealing opportunities for participants to act otherwise. We conclude with a proposal for further research shaped by this theory that explores the making of actual community treatment orders to reveal where there is potential to change existing relations towards more positive effects for participants.

Effectiveness of Community Treatment Order in Patients with a First Episode of Psychosis: A Mirror-Image Study.

Poor adherence to antipsychotic medications is strongly associated with psychotic relapses and hospitalizations. This may hinder patients' ability to function, particularly in a first episode of psychosis (FEP). Poor adherence to treatment may be due to poor insight that can alter the capacity to consent to care, including pharmacotherapy. When patients are judged legally lacking the capacity to consent to care, treatment can be mandated through community treatment orders (CTOs). This naturalistic study examines the effects of CTOs in FEP patients. This study examines 38 FEP patients legally deemed unable to consent to care during their follow-up. Using a naturalistic mirror-image approach, we compare clinical (Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms [SAPS], Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms [SANS]), functional (Global Assessment of Functioning Scale [GAF], Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale [SOFAS]), and service use (number of emergency room visits, length of hospitalizations) indicators before and after CTO. After the CTO, 37 of 38 patients complied with treatment. Statistically significant improvements in clinical (▵SAPS = -6.3; 95% CI, 4.5 to 8.1 and ▵SANS = -2.2; 95% CI, 0.9 to 3.4, P < 0.01) and functional (▵GAF = +15.0; 95% CI, 8.4 to 21.6, ▵SOFAS = +18.6; 95% CI, 12.8 to 24.4, P < 0.01) outcomes were observed. Significant reduction in emergency room visits ( P = 0.016) and days of hospitalization per month in acute care units ( P < 0.05) were identified with no difference in hospital days per month in short-stay units. Moreover, encounters with case managers ( P = 0.008) and attendance of cognitive therapy sessions ( P = 0.031) were significantly higher. However, patients' weight significantly increased after CTO (▵weight = +8.0 kg, P < 0.01). In FEP patients, CTOs improve compliance to treatment, which contributes to reducing positive and negative symptoms, shortening hospital stays, and improving functioning.

What Families Have to Say about Community Treatment Orders (CTOs)

Qualitative studies provide a different kind of understanding of the effectiveness of community treatment orders (CTOs) by exploring the perspectives of stakeholders. This article documents a systematic review of 12 qualitative studies that explored the views of families of individuals on a CTO. Relevant databases and grey literature were searched. Themes were identified: the benefits of CTOs outweigh the disadvantages, CTOs increased their involvement in care, and families were dissatisfied with aspects of the CTO process. Recommendations include how to maximize the benefits of CTOs, reduce administrative burdens and employ strategies to increase involvement of families in the care of their loved ones.

Exploratory study of the use of community treatment orders with clients of an Ontario ACT team

ABSTRACTCommunity Treatment Orders (CTOs) have raised questions about coercion, lack of autonomy, and effectiveness in reducing hospitalizations and improving service users’ quality of life. This study examined the experiences of clients and clinicians when CTOs are used in combination with Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) in a recovery oriented approach. Eleven clients who were or had previously been on a CTO and eight ACT clinicians were interviewed. Although most clients had negative feelings about CTOs, some acknowledged their lives had improved. Clinicians reported that the decision to employ a CTO is sometimes debated within the team but they agreed that combining CTOs and ACT resulted in regular access to mental health supports, fewer hospitalizations and overall improvement of quality of life for their clients.

What Clinicians Say About the Experience of Working With Individuals on Community Treatment Orders.

Community treatment orders (CTOs) refer to a variety of legal schemes that require a person with a serious mental illness to follow a plan of treatment and supervision while living in the community. Use of CTOs has been controversial, and they have been the subject of a considerable amount of quantitative and qualitative research. This article reports the results of a systematic review of qualitative studies focused on understanding the views and experiences of clinicians who work with individuals on CTOs. Relevant databases and gray literature were searched for articles that used a qualitative methodology for data collection and analysis to examine clinicians' perspectives. CTOs were defined as various legal schemes, including court-ordered outpatient commitment and renewable conditional-leave provisions initiated while a person is an inpatient in a psychiatric unit. Mandatory treatment and supervision required after a person has been charged with or convicted of committing a criminal offense was not considered. Fourteen articles met inclusion criteria. They represented the views of more than 700 clinicians from six international jurisdictions. Three themes were identified: endorsement of the benefits of CTOs despite tensions both within and between clinicians concerning several aspects of CTOs; belief that medication compliance is a central aspect of CTOs; and acknowledgment that there is room for improvement in CTO implementation, monitoring, and administration. Strategies for reducing tensions and improving administration of CTOs are discussed. Clinicians view CTOs as providing benefits to their clients but struggle with the coercive nature of these tools.

Community treatment orders in England: review of usage from national data

About 5500 patients are subject to CTOs at any one time. Each year, ~4500 patients are made subject to a CTO each year and ~2500 are fully discharged, usually by the responsible clinician; fewer than half of CTO patients are recalled, and two-thirds of recalls end in revocation. The low rate of CTO discharges by mental health tribunals (below 5%) suggests that they are not used inappropriately.Clinical implicationsThe introduction of CTOs in England has coincided with a reduction in psychiatric service provision due to the economic downturn. Pressures on services might be even more severe if patients currently subject to CTOs instead needed to be detained as in-patients.Declaration of interestNone.